Re: Cancelling implicit rules

[Thorstein Thorsteinsson]

> Your attachment was corrupted.  It's simplest if you just include the
> makefile as a normal text file, or attach it using something basic like
> text/plain, rather than trying to send a compressed tar file, unless the
> makefile is really large (which it doesn't seem like this one is).

Thanks Paul and sorry. I append it here at the end. To run my example
please do

touch tmp.f; make tmp.o

Best wishes,
T.Thorsteinsson

------- gnumake version (1) on i686 under Suse Linux 6.4 -----------

GNU Make version 3.78.1, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath.
Built for i686-pc-linux-gnu
Copyright (C) 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99
        Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Report bugs to <address@hidden>.
------- gnumake version (2) on Cray T3E under unicosmk -------------
GNU Make version 3.79.1, by Richard Stallman and Roland McGrath.
Built for alpha-cray-unicosmk2.0.5.X
Copyright (C) 1988, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 2000
        Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.
There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A
PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

Report bugs to <address@hidden>.
------- Makefile ---------------------------------------------------
.SUFFIXES:
.SUFFIXES: .f .F .o
%.F: %.f
        cp $*.f $*.F
%.o: %.F
        cp $*.F $*.o
%.f: %.F ;
%.o: %.f ;
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Copy of original mail follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------
To the gnumake developers:

If I understand correctly, the following example does
not work according to the description in the manual.

I am trying to override the implicit rules already
defined by gnumake, and instead create my own defining
the sequence %.f -> %.F -> %.o.

In the attached example I do:

> make tmp.o
make: Circular tmp.F <- tmp.f dependency dropped.
make: `tmp.o' is up to date.
>

but tmp.o is not created (because there is still a
%.F -> %.f dependency ?).

My main reason for avoiding a direct %.f -> %.o rule
is that I want to delete %.F in case of errors/interrupts.
Using the target .DELETE_ON_ERROR does not seem to be
applicable, because %.F would not appear as a target (?)

Any help would be much appreciated!

Best wishes,
T.Thorsteinsson
-------------------------------------------------------------------